In 1527, Archbishop Bartolomé de Las Casas Cuzco of Spain wrote about tobacco's adverse effect on the brain known as "addiction," among Indians, and their reporting their inability to stop smoking, i.e., their addiction!

Tobacco is such a powerful drug that it was used in the pre-modern-anesthetic era, like an anesthetic, to render the entire body limp, says Herbert H. Tidswell, M.D., The Tobacco Habit: Its History and Pathology (London: J. & A. Churchill, 1912), p 28.

Addiction should be seen

"as a process in which an abnormal amount of certain chemicals in the brain . . . make an individual extremely susceptible to . . . drugs," thus "should not longer be thought of as indications of a person's moral evil or weakness of character but rather as a chronic organic disease."—William A. Check, Ph.D., The Mind-Body Connection in Dale C. Garrell, M.D., The Encyclopedia of Health: Medical Disorders and Their Treatment (New York: Chealsea House Pub, 1990), p 68. "Addiction, one of the most destructive and common behavioral disorders in many societies, is a good example of the interaction between psychosocial and biochemical factors . . . a variety of social forces."

"Certainly, a long literature exists on use of tobacco and its derivatives in [Indian] ceremonial trance induction, witchcraft, divination . . . .

"Native use of tobacco parallels that of other hallucinogenic substances . . .

"The amounts of harman and norharman in cigarette smoke are about 10-20 mcg. per cigarette. This is about 40 to 100 times greater than that found in the tobacco leaf, indicating that pyrosynthesis occurs in the leaves during the burning . . . .

"Because addiction is a process that involves far more than conditioning, and addictive drugs not only modify [impair] behavior but the brain itself, neuroscientists have long known that these substances act on the cellular level. . . . act on specific [brain] receptors—sites to which they would bind—on the membranes of certain [brain] neurons."—Richard M. Restak, M.D., The Mind (New York: Bantam Books, 1988), p 128.

The brain uses chemicals (neurotransmitters) in its own functioning. The addiction issue involves ingesting in essence the wrong chemical, like for example, putting water in your car's gas tank. The tank will "accept" it, but the car won't work right, if at all, thereafter!

This is like what happens in the brain.

"Certain exogenous (externally administered) substances also bind to the same [brain] receptors [as the right chemicals would]. For example, where the acetylcholine molecule binds, nicotine adheres. Where serotonoin binds, LSD adheres. Where noradrenaline binds, mescaline adheres. All of these substances—nicotine, LSD, mescaline—subvert the brain's natural chemical controls in ways that no one—neither the drug users nor neuroscientists—ever anticipated."—Restak, supra, p 132.

Addiction/Craving Description(99.5% of Smokers)

"When the brain is flooded with an unusually large quantity of a drug, the nerve cells respond by cutting down the number of receptors [just as the eye lens shuts out excess light].

"That's why drug abusers [developing "craving"] need more and more of the drug to get the same effect.

"Then, when the drug is taken away, the brain's natural chemicals have fewer receptors to lock onto. . . . the result is . . . withdrawal."—Restak,
supra, pp 132-133.

Dr. Elisa Harris, The Effects of Its Use as a Luxary on the Physical and Moral Nature of Man (New York: Wm. Harned, 1853), p 21 ("Most emphatically does tobacco enslave its votaries . . .").

this means it acts "to produce . . . the most deplorable effect of insanity [brain damage], which is the dethronement of reason from its governing power," which does "take away the power of resistance," apt words from People v Carmichael, 5 Mich 10, 20; 71 Am Dec 769, 775 (1858).
And see the overview on resultant brain effect.

How much is "unusually large quantity"? The drugs that impair the brain in this manner

"are incredibly powerful. One . . . etorphine, [acts] in doses only one five-thousandth of the effective dose of morphine. A dart saturated with etorphine can stop a charging elephant in its tracks."—Restak, supra, p 128.

"'Addiction to drugs is one of the very few illnesses that human beings encounter in which they can actually be suffering and still be denying that they have the problem. If I'm bleeding, I'm going to go for help. But when we're bleeding [in the brain], we can't see the blood and we can easily deny. We lie to ourselves. That's why many . . . have been using drugs [smoking] for ten and twenty and thirty years.'"—Restak, supra, p 135, quoting Dr. Richard Miller, Director, Coke-Enders.
See parallel data by

Eli F. Brown, The Eclectic Physiology or Guide to Good Health (New York: American Book Co, 1886), p 22, and others.

Dr. Guy Fagon (French 'Surgeon-General,' 26 March 1699), noting that tobacco is “a poison that is more dangerous than hemlock, deadlier than opium. . . . Assuredly, when [people] try it for the first time, [they] feel an uneasiness that tells us that we have taken poison.” Soon “all reasoning, all warning is in vain. He cannot shake off his enemy . . . tobacco alone becomes a fatal, insatiable necessity [addiction] . . . smoking is a permanent epilepsy.”

Contrary to mythology, there is nothing "unique" about this process. Concerning carbon monoxide, radioactivity, nicotine (C10H14N2), etc., the effects are "natural and probable consequences," not "accidents." The addictive process begins immediately, that is how new smokers, generally youth, become addicted so fast, and immediately after their early smoking.

With this introduction in mind, here is a list of examples of the history of data on this subject:

In 1527, Archbishop Bartolomé de las Casas (1484-1566) of Spain wrote about tobacco's adverse effect on the brain known as "addiction," among Indians, and their reporting their inability to stop smoking!

In 1587, a Franciscan monk wrote, "There are many Spaniards here who have brought their bad habits with them; in particular they have a new sort of debauchery which they call smoking. . . . The soldiers do swagger about puffing fire and smoke from their mouths, and the silly people look on and gape with astonishment," says
Count Egon Corti, A History of Smoking, transl. by Paul England (New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1932), p 100. At 101: "Both armies had long been inveterate smokers, unable to dispense with their habit [craving]."

In 1604, James I, King of England wrote a denunciation of smoking due to tobacco being "harmful to the brain," (his doctors had told him).

In 1669, the French Academy of Science (comparable to the U.S. Surgeon General Committee) held a national medical conference on tobacco's mental effects. The King's physician, Dr. Guy C. Fagon (1638-1718) advised that experience had shown that tobacco use shortened human life.

On 26 March 1699, Dr. Fagon reported that tobacco is

"a poison that is more dangerous than hemlock, deadlier than opium. . . . Assuredly, when [people] try it for the first time, [they] feel an uneasiness that tells us that we have taken poison." But continuing, soon "all reasoning, all warning is in vain [as tobacco ruins the self-defense reflex]. He cannot shake off his enemy . . . tobacco alone becomes a fatal, insatiable necessity [addiction] . . . smoking is a permanent epilepsy." [Context].

In 1836, was therefore said, "A [hu]man will die of an infusion of tobacco as of a shot through the head."—Samuel Green, New England Almanack and Farmer's Friend (1836). This fact was re-verified as recently as in 2006.

In 1853, William A. Alcott, M.D., published The Physical and Moral Effects of Using Tobacco as a Luxury: A Prize Essay (New York: Wm. Harned, 1853). The book described tobacco addiction, enslaving smokers, using the term "tobacco drunkard." Here are excerpts:

"Most emphatically does tobacco enslave its votaries. . . . It is the uniform testimony of those who have attempted to emancipate themselves from their attachment and bondage to tobacco, that to break the chains in which they are bound, requires the sternest efforts of reason, conscience, and the will." (p 21)

"The slave of tobacco is seldom found reclaimable . . . . I know full well the difficulty of reclaiming the drunkard. But the tobacco drunkard is still less hopeful. I have, indeed, in the course of the last quarter of a century, met with instances of entire emancipation, but they have been few and far between." (p 23)

Americans took heed. Result: There was declining U.S. tobacco use, cited by J. B. Neil, 1 The Lancet (#1740) 23 (3 Jan 1857). Prior to mass advertising, non-smoking was "common" in the U.S., said Prof. John I. D. Hinds, The Use of Tobacco (Nashville, Tenn: Cumberland Presbyterian Publishing House, 1882), p. 10.
This trend was not reversed until the arrival of pro-cigarette disinformation advertising and widespread media censorship of tobacco's adverse effects.

"the worst of [tobacco's effects] is the destruction of the reasoning power in man."

P 164 cites smoker death "due to congestion of the brain from cigarette poisoning."

1888: "Nicotine is one of the most powerful of the 'nerve poisons' known. Its virulence is compared to that of prussic acid. . . . .

"It seems to destroy life not by attacking a few but all of the functions essential to it. . . .

"A significant indication of this is that there is no substance which can counteract its effects. . . .

"the use of tobacco in even the smallest amount impairs the functional action of the liver on the blood passing through it, and that the abnormal state of the blood thus caused will manifest itself by disturbance in the brain."

"Thus the nerves are under the constant influence of the drug and much injury to the system results." C. W. Lyman, 48 New York Medical Journal 262-265 (8 Sep 1888).

"Original research on the physiologic effects of carbon monoxide was completed in the 19th century." "The smoker of cigarettes is constantly exposed to levels of carbon monoxide in the range of 500 to 1,500 parts per million when he inhales the cigarette smoke." G. H. Miller, 72 J Indiana St Med Ass'n (12) 903-905 (Dec 1979).
[Context].

"The action of carbonic oxide" was thus long known, e.g., "Autopsies have revealed large foci of softening in the brain, hæmorrhages into the meninges, and capillary apoplexies in the brain substance." George W. Jacoby, 50 New York Med J 172-174 (17 Aug 1889)
[Context].

In 1889, in State v Ohmer, 34 Mo App 115; 1879 WL 1764 (5 Feb 1889), the Missouri Court of Appeals took note of tobacco's addictive effect, ruled it not a necessity pursuant to normal law concepts, so upheld the conviction of a tobacco seller who had argued that tobacco is a necessity of life, so it should be exempt from the normal sales law. This web writer published reference to this case in The Macomb Daily (Mt. Clemens, MI) in 1995. FDA Commissioner David Kessler's staff thereupon contacted me for details on this ancient data showing the addictive effect to be long known! (Actually, there were even older precedents!)

Also in 1889, doctors reported to the Michigan House of Representatives about cigarettes' mental effects, and cited symptoms re which modern terminology would cite as addiction, for example,

"The action of the brain is impaired thereby, the ability to think, and in fact all mental concentration is weakened."

It then cited the case of an individual, John Powers, hospitalized due to tobacco's severe mental effect.

Also in 1889, in Talbott v Stemmons' Executor, 89 Ky 223; 12 SW 297 (24 Oct 1889), the Kentucky Appeals Court upheld a decedent's promise to give her "grandson . . . five hundred dollars at [her] death if he will never take another chew of tobacco or smoke another cigar up to [the time of her] death."

In 1898, in Gundling v City of Chicago, 176 Ill 340; 52 NE 44, 45 (24 Oct 1898), the Illinois Supreme Court upheld a criminal conviction of selling cigarettes without a license, as "The consensus . . . in reference to the use of cigarettes is that they are injurious to the young with immature minds, and common observation causes us to know that tobacco in the form of cigarettes is more largely used by those of young and immature minds than by any other class." (See "Medicolegal: Power to Regulate Sale of Cigarettes," 35 J Am Med Ass'n 298-299 [4 Aug 1900])

In 1899, Dr. Matthew Woods in 32 Journ. of the Am. Med. Ass'n (#13) 685 (1 April 1899), published an article on the subject of tobacco and included data on its mental effects.

In 1900, Winfred S. Hall, Ph.D., M.D., Elementary Anatomy, Physiology and Hygiene for Higher Grammar Grades (New York: American Book Co, 1900, said "Tobacco contains a sharp-tasting liquid called nicotine, which is a quick-acting and deadly poison. Because of this poison, the juice of the tobacco is never purposely swallowed; but in chewing, the saliva dissolves the nicotine, and a part of it is absorbed into the system; while in smoking, the nicotine in the smoke and vapor is absorbed 72by the saliva and the moist membranes of the mouth and nose, where it exerts all of its harmful effects . . .," pp 71-72. "What has been said in the preceding lessons about the influence of alcohol upon the will power, applies with equal truth to such narcotics as tobacco and opium," p 73.

In 1905, in Kappes v City of Chicago, 119 Ill App 436 (27 March 1905), the Illinois Appeals Court rejected a lawsuit by cigarette seller Kappes to enjoin Chicago from enforcing its anti-cigarette licensing law. The court supported the law "on the ground that weak and immature persons injured their health by . . . use [of cigarettes]."

By 1907, there was

"a full . . . knowledge of the effects of tobacco on the nervous system. . . . A variety of substances have been found in tobacco aside from nicotine. Some of these are pyridin, picolin, tulidin, parvolin, collodin, rubidin, varidin; also carbolic acid and marsh gas." The result is that tobacco "registers a permanent and definite impression in nervous structures when it is used for months or years."

"Tobacco is a powerful depressant to the motor or efferent nerves, acting primarily upon their peripheral filaments. . . . The sympathetic ganglia are first stimulated and then depressed by nicotine. . . . In chronic poisoning there is more or less gastroenteritis of a hemorrhagic nature. Ecchymosis occurs in the pleura and peritioneum. Hyperemia of the lungs, brain and cord is found. . . . Coarse lesions have been found in the brain and spinal cord."—L. Pierce Clark, M.D., 71 Medical Record (#26) 1072-1073 (29 June 1907).

In 1913, in State v Olson, 26 ND 304, 319-320; 144 NW 661, 667 (29 Nov 1913), the North Dakota Supreme Court upheld the criminal conviction of a tobacco seller and said

"the use of tobacco in any form is uncleanly, and . . . excessive use is injurious . . . . its use by the young is especially so. Tobacco, in short, is under the ban. One of the strongest arguments . . . against the cigarette, is that cigarettes are easily and cheaply obtained, and that [children are] liable to be tempted by that fact, and that the use of tobacco will thus be increased. . . ."

In 1914, "And despite the fact that cigarette smoking is the worst form of tobacco addiction, virtually all boys who smoke start with cigarettes" (citing Dr. Charles B. Towns).

In 1917, a smoker was so addicted as to set himself afire with his own smoking, in the case of Haller v City of Lansing, 195 Mich 753; 162 NW 335 (9 April 1917).

Also in 1917, Dr. James L. Tracy published an article citing smokers' incessant littering as one of the symptoms of their addiction and narcosis.

In 1918, in In re Betts, 66 Ind App 484, 486; 118 NE 551, 552 (18 Jan 1918), "an habitual and almost constant user of tobacco" was killed on the job when, "two or three steps" from his job site, walking toward to a store "to get some tobacco," apparently suffering withdrawal symptoms causing him to pay less attention than he ought, "he was struck by an automobile . . . and killed almost instantly."

In 1920, in Nossaman v State, 107 Kan 715, 717, 720; 193 P 347, 348-349 (6 Nov 1920), the Kansas Supreme Court upheld the criminal conviction of a tobacco seller who violated the anti-cigarette sale, as "For a number of years there has been a well-settled opinion that the use of cigarettes especially by persons of immature years was harmful, and the courts have recognized that they were deleterious in their effects. . . it was not unreasonable for the state to declare. . . that cigarettes are injurious to public health and welfare. . . ."

In 1921, in Palmer v Keene Forestry Assn, 80 N H 68; 112 A 798 (1 Feb 1921), the New Hampshire Supreme Court refers to smokers being "addicted to the use of cigarettes," so much that they caused a fire that destroyed a building owned by Palmer. The court ruled in favor of Palmer, and required the defendant liable for the damages as "chargeable with the knowledge that ordinarily prudent men would possess upon this subject," i.e., that smoking is well-established to be addictive and that harm is a foreseeable natural and probable consequences result from the mental effects including fire-setting behavior.

In 1922, Michigan's own Dr. John Harvey Kellogg published a book, Tobaccoism, identifying smoking effects including its mental effects. Example: ". . . the immediate effect of smoking . . . is a lowering of the accuracy of finely coordinated reactions (including associative thought processes)."

In 1924, in Tanton v McKenney, 226 Mich 245; 197 NW 510; 33 ALR 1175 (24 March 1924), an addicted smoker was expelled from a teacher training program for smoking. She sued, and lost as the Michigan Supreme Court upheld the expulsion.

In 1925, the French word "éclatement" (referring to a tire blow-out) was used to describe the effect of nicotine on the brain, the damage underlying "addiction." Also the same year, 1925, a medical book was published detailing the cigarettes-cancer link.

In 1926, "Nicotine is one of the most fatal and rapid of poisons . . . . It acts with a swiftness equalled only by hydrocyanic acids." It is like "other narcotics," e.g., opium, cannabis, mescaline, and peyote.—Tobald H. Sollman, Manual of Pharmacology, 3rd ed (1926).

In 1928, in Fischer v R. Hoe & Co, Inc, 224 App Div 335; 230 NYS 755 (20 Sep 1928), a smoker was so addicted that though he was wearing a bandage "saturated with alcohol and boric acid [he] ignited a match to light a cigarette, and in so doing the dressing caught fire. The burn caused the loss of a part of the thumb and little finger, and other involvements of the hand . . . fifty-five per cent loss of use of the right hand."

In 1930, in Dattilo's Case, 273 Mass 333; 173 NE 552 (28 Nov 1930), the widow of a smoker who worked with gasoline and had gasoline on his clothing sought workers compensation when her husband died as follows: While his trousers were covered with gasoline, he "took a match from his pocket and scratched it on his trousers for the purpose of lighting a cigarette . . . in his mouth, and 'he became a human torch.' He never recovered from his burns and died." That is a lot of addiction!!

In 1931, "One of the most serious aspects of the tobacco habit is its absolute enslaving powers. Very few who become confirmed addicts can break the chains that nicotine forges. . . . there is perhaps nothing that holds its victims more tenaciously than does tobacco. And . . . cigarette addiction undoubtedly leads to the use of . . . other habit-forming drugs."—Daniel H. Kress, M.D., The Cigarette As A Physician Sees It (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Ass'n, 1931), p 68. "Talk about 'personal liberty'! The cigarette takes it away forever." (p 71).

In 1937, it was noted in tobacco context, "that a drug addict, regardless of his education and ability and the great responsibility placed upon him as an exemplary to youth, has his mind so befogged with regard to the effects of the drug of his addiction that he is unable to comprehend or unwilling to be guided by established facts."—Prof. A. Zeleny, Clean Life Educator (1937).

"In all jurisdictions the cigarette has been [an] article for isolation and classification. The sales or gift of a cigarette is prohibited in some jurisdictions. It is not a 'useful commodity.' The nicotine is harmful. The harmful properties of the article do the classifying. . . . "

"Furthermore, it is common knowledge that the [nature] of the cigarette [does] tempt the young to indulgences which produce tobacco addicts. This justifies the isolation of cigarettes . . . ."

In 1940, in McAfee v Travis Gas Corp, 137 Tex 314; 153 SW2d 442 (4 June 1941) (employee smoked around gas pipe, which was leaking, resultant explosion caused injury to another person; "gas line was in bad condition, and had been leaking gas from openings therein for many months." Mr. McAfee "went with" smoker Joe "Woods to where the pipe line was leaking and was in the act of pointing out such leaks to Woods when Woods struck a match on the sole of his shoe to light a cigarette. The blaze from the match ignited the escaping gas, causing an explosion. As a result of such explosion McAfee was injured." The victim employee McAfee had not foreseen that the smoker was so mentally addicted and abulic that he'd start a fire by a gas line! The employer was held responsible; it had, of course, hired the addict despite the case law to avoid such negligent hiring.) (See also the similar Shipley case. Smokers' typical craving symptoms are foreseeable for employers, as a matter of law, holding them liable for harm smokers cause to fellow employees.)

Smoking is a disease, “one of our most serious diseases.” "Smokers show the same [delusional] attitude to tobacco as addicts to their drug, and their judgment is therefore biased [in denial] in giving an opinion of its effect on them [and others]."—Lennox Johnston, "Tobacco Smoking and Nicotine," 243 The Lancet 741, 742 (19 Dec 1942).

"The fixity of smokers' delusions is doubtless related to the strength of their craving for tobacco, and in many cases this is so strong that the smoker projects his repressed self-criticism on to his would-be undeceiver, characterizing him as a crank or fanatic, or at the least, as hopelessly biased."

Dr. James L. Tracy, Medical Rev. of Reviews, Vol. XXIII(12), p. 818, Dec 1917, siad likewise, "So far, in fact, does this grandeur impression carry, that to the user of tobacco any opposition to its use at once suggests that there is mental abnormality in those who would interfere with its use.” And: "It is intrusive and obtrusive . . . most intolerant of restraint . . . ."

See also data on paranoid and hallucinogenic symptoms of smokers.
"Of course, a confirmed addict is likely to be disconcerted . . . people being very bad judges of their own performance [with claims] that they had done better than usual . . . when as a matter of fact they had not done so well [indeed] illusion of increased efficiency."—Prof. Pryns Hopkins, Ph.D., Gone Up in Smoke: An Analysis of Tobaccoism (Culver City, CA: The Highland Press, 1948), p 78.

"The person addicted to tobacco behaves in a specific way when forced by medical necessities to restrict or give up smoking completely. He acts like a child to whom mother refuses oral gratification. He immediately feels unjustly treated and reacts . . . with aggression."

"Addiction to tobacco, like addiction to opium, is a specific disease . . . . Its protracted course, the enormous numbers affected, and spreading infection make smoking one of our most serious diseases."

In 1954, "Tobacco is a narcotic . . . producing tolerance, dependency, and withdrawal phenomena. . . Thus it fulfills the requirements for the definition of an addicting substance [with] fatal implications."—Lt. Col. Charles T. Brown, "Tobacco Addiction: A Suggestion as to Its Remedy," 50 Texas St Journal of Medicine (#1) 35-36 (Jan 1954). P 36 cites "the goal of detoxification common to all drug withdrawal plans," but that "relapse in drug addictions is the rule rather than the exception."

"The term 'narcotic' is broadly defined to encompass any substance, including . . . hallucinogens, which directly induces sleep, allays sensibility, or blunts the senses, and which, when taken in large quantities, produces narcotism or insensibility."—25 Am Jur 2d, Drugs, Narcotics, and Poisons § 2." Annot., 92 ALR3d 47 (1979).

In 1962, "The first step toward addiction may be as innocent as a boy's puff on a cigarette in an alleyway," said the U.S. Supreme Court in Robinson v California, 370 US 660, 670; 82 S Ct 1417, 1422; 8 L Ed 2d 758 (25 June 1962).

"During the Second World War many consultants and regimental medical officers had an opportunity to observe tobacco addiction in a large number of serving men and officers."

Indeed, "the signs of the true tobacco-addict could be seen."

Smoker behavior did "reveal marked resentment patterns towards those who were trying to reduce" their "smoking . . . The existence of the addiction pattern and the withdrawal syndrome were very real to those who saw any number of service men."

And, "we still have tobacco-addicts with us."

In 1963, a study reported:

"Heavy cigarette smokers thus appear to be true addicts, showing not only social habituation but . . . physiologic withdrawal effects. . . . concerns about the dangers of smoking, latent but readily mobilized in our population, are effectively masked by denial and related psychic defenses."

"replacing the 'morbid preoccupation' of the mind with the cigarette by diversion of thought to more essential and positive thoughts," and in view of smoker withdrawal symptoms, "smoking . . . is primarily and foremost a psychological condition--however strong the pharmacological effect of the habit-forming drug, nicotine, may be."—E. G. W. Hoffstaedt, M.D., "The Treatment of the Unwilling Smoker," 195 The Practitioner (#1170) pp 794-796 (Dec 1965).

Also in 1965, pursuant to the evidence, in the court precedent of Aldridge v Saxey, 242 Or 238; 409 P2d 184 (22 Dec 1965), the Oregon Supreme Court said that "it cannot be said that" a smoker "is a person of normal sensibilities"

In 1970, Colonel Jacobs said:

"The crucial smoking problem is addiction. . . . Smoking remains the foremost preventable cause of disease, disability and death in the United States. . . . The better educated Americans have been the first to decide to preserve themselves and their offspring by discontinuing smoking." Col. Eugene C. Jacobs, "Smoking: Insidious Suicide and Personal Air Pollution," 135 Military Medicine 678, 679-680 (August 1970).
He noted [smoking ban] benefits such as “A great savings in health to the military. . . ,” “A great reduction in the shortages of doctors and nurses,” “A great reduction in the overcrowding of hospitals,” “The virtual elimination of lung cancer, emphysema, and thrombo-angiitis obliterans,” etc. He said, “Tobacco smoke is offensive and nauseating to millions of non-smokers.”
See also Amber Moore, "Future-Minded People More Likely to Ditch Smoking" (Medical Daily, 5 September 2012) ("
People who think about the future are more likely to quit smoking than those who don't, a new study says.")

Also in 1970, in Tritt v Richardson, 320 F Supp 871, 873-874 (D WD Va, 30 Oct 1970), a federal district court observed that the sick smoker in court "continues to smoke excessively (a package a day), contrary to doctor's orders [and said this] is troubling. . . . Since . . . his doctors have advised him to stop smoking . . . [t]he court suggests to the [smoker] that he should do everything possible to follow his doctors' advice." (Even better, deal with the systemic aspect as per the Iowa example or at least the Tennessee example).

In 1974, "It is also of relevance that the absorption of Nicotine through the lungs is extremely rapid and efficient and reaches the brain more rapidly than after intravenous injection. The arm-to-brain circulation time averages 13.5 seconds, whilst the lung-to-brain time is about 7.5 seconds." M. A. H. Russell, 212 The Practitioner 791-800 (June 1974).

"his chronic bronchitis resulted from work [but his] doctor, testified explicitly that [Hammond] was a heavy cigarette smoker, and the doctor felt this was a factor--a very heavy factor. . . Speaking particularly of the smoking, Dr. Merrill testified Hammond was pretty stubborn and he could not get him to stop smoking. He said Hammond was pretty much addicted to the cigarettes."

In 1977, the Surgeon General's colleagues said that if the public knew smoking's severe mental effects, making it not a habit but worse (a mental disorder), that fact becoming publicly known (instead of censored as it is) would have a major impact on the public's perception of smokers ("a profound effect upon the reputation of this behavior")! See the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), book, Research on Smoking Behavior, Research Monograph 17, Publication ADM 78-581, p 5 (December 1977), quoting Murray E. Jarvik, M.D., Ph.D.

Ed. Note: Bluntly, that means the public would realize smokers are typically mentally disordered and display symptoms accordingly. Here are some examples of symptoms observable in smokers:

Brain damage is discussed by Dr. James C. Coleman, in Abnormal Psychology and Modern Life, 5th edition (Scott, Foresman & Co, 1976), pp. 460-461, “where the damage is severe . . . symptoms typically include . . . a tendency to confabulate . . . to fill in gaps . . . Impairment of learning, comprehension, and judgment—with ideation tending to be concrete and impoverished—and with inability to think on higher conceptual levels and to plan.” (Details). When a person is brain damaged, they are unable to associate and apply the general laws to a situation, they need specific guidance step by step like cattle.

In 1978, William Pollin, M.D., then NIDA Director, said that NIDA gave "increased priority to" combating smoking for "several reasons: the increasing identification of smoking as a prototypic addiction, the status of smoking as a gateway drug to use of stronger or illicit drugs, and [NIDA's] focus on substance abuse as a generic phenomenon that includes tobacco," p vi.

In 1979, in Jacobs v Michigan Mental Health Dept, 88 Mich App 503; 276 NW2d 627 (6 Feb 1979), the Michigan Court of Appeals rejected a smoker's objection to the use of physical force being directed against him to stop him from smoking. The mentally ill smoker committed at the institution, had refused to stop smoking when told by the staff to stop. Staff had then used physical force, to forcibly stop his smoking. The court upheld that use of force.

Also in 1979, in Rum River Lumber Co v State of Minnesota, 282 NW2d 882 (Minn, 27 July 1979), the Minnesota Supreme Court refers to a smoker with a "history of mental disturbances." The smoker was in the custody of the Minnesota Mental Health Department and escaped. While an escapee, he caused a fire destroying a lumber company's property. The lumber company sued the state for negligently allowing the escape. The court noted that the smoker had a "history of mental disturbances . . . threatened the staff . . . stole" and had previously "set a fire." So the State was found negligent and liable for the damages. Reason: it is not necessary "that the specific conduct . . . must be foreseeable. It is sufficient . . . that the . . . risk of harm . . . be foreseeable." (Click here for further analysis and precedents.)

In early 1980, as predicted in 1977, supra, both the government and the American Psychiatric Association issued books listing smoking in separate classifications for its mental effect—meaning, as a "mental disorder."

The said reference books are

the International Classification of Disease, 9th ed. (ICD-9) (1980), p 233, identifying "tobacco use disorder" and medical code 305.1; and

the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed. (DSM-III), pp 159-160 and 176-178. Tobacco-caused mental disorder is cited as “obviously widespread,” i.e., “approximately 50 percent of smokers.” This disorder involves smokers who try but fail to stop smoking; have a “serious physical disorder” known to be “exacerbated by tobacco use”; or are developing “tobacco withdrawal.” Typical smoker symptoms include “irritability,” “difficulty concentrating,” “restlessness,” and “drowsiness,” among others.

Tobacco causes brain damage, is called "Tobacco Organic Mental Disorder" (TOMD). The Manual includes smokers in the TOMD category if withdrawal symptoms occur within 24 hours (most smokers have symptoms in two hours). An extensive analysis of the latter is found in a Veterans Adminstration litigation case by a veteran seeking compensation for tobacco-caused injury. Note that tobacco mental disorder symptoms include odd sterotyped gestures, typical of other mental disorders as well. (The U.S. government, the IRS, deems treatment for this mental disorder, smoking, as a valid medical deduction, as valid as for a deduction for treating any other mental disorder; see the 1982 Michigan Law Review advocacy article).

In October 1980, this web writer published that fact in a national anti-drug magazine in the context of the massive costs to society of smoking; and in November 1980, repeated it in The Macomb Daily.

In 1980 and 1981, federal courts in Nat'l Org. for Reform of Marijuana Laws v Bell, 488 F Supp 123, 138 (D DC, 11 Feb 1980) (referencing tobacco as a drug) and Caprin v Harris, 511 F Supp 589, 590 n 3 (D ND NY, 8 April 1981) (referencing the DSM-III), have said this (reference to tobacco smoking in mental disorder terms) in official documents. In the latter case, a federal district court dealing with a smoker with the symptom of "refusal to cease smoking" took judicial notice of the International Classification of Disease, 9th rev., and its listing of "tobacco use disorder" in the mental disorders section, and of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) and its listing of "tobacco dependence." The court noted that, "There is considerable support in recent medical literature for the proposition that smoking under some circumstances is a 'disease' similar to 'alcoholism.'"

The massive quantities of carbon monoxide (500-1500 ppm) result in an impaired oxygen supply to the brain, i.e., "cerebral anoxia," cell by cell, year after year, and when to any cell, "the oxygen supply is cut off, then damage to neurones occurs after a few minutes. Some neurones die." Anthony Hopkins, Epilepsy: The Facts (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1981).

In 1981, in Shipley v City of Johnson City, 620 SW2d 500 (Tenn App, 24 April 1981) lv app den 3 August 1981, the Tennessee Appeals Court found that Shipley's foreman, Ronald Profitt, at the site of a ruptured gas line,

"inexplicably . . . put a cigarette in his mouth, removed a lighter from his pocket, and immediately after an exclamation by Mr. [Charles] Cox [a fellow employee], 'Surely to hell you ain't going to light that cigarette,' lit his lighter precipitating an explosion which injured both himself and Mr. Shipley . . . his [the addict's] actions were involuntary and . . . he was not really conscious of what he was doing . . . The injury was a direct, foreseeable and natural consequence [in terms of holding the employer liable."

Ed. Note: See also the similar McAfee case. Smokers' typical craving symptoms are foreseeable for employers, as a matter of law, holding them liable for harm smokers cause to fellow employees.

In 1982, "some 90% of the nicotine delivered to the lungs goes directly to the brain, and it gets there in only 7 s[econds]," "much faster than a heroin rush from a peripheral vein." William A. Check, PhD, 247 J Am Med Ass'n (#17) 2333-2338 (7 May 1982).

In November 1982, the Michigan Law Review had an article on tax deductions for treating smoker mental disorder, citation: Comment, Tobacco Addiction, 81 Mich Law Rev (#1) 237-258 (Nov 1982). Key words include these: "Overwhelming clinical evidence supports characterizing smoking as a physical addiction, one that persists even though the addict knows it subjects him to serious risk of death. Both medical and legal authorities now recognize such a condition as a disease." "Nicotine exerts physiological effects on heart rate, metabolism, and (as would be expected from its addictive influence) on the brain," p 240. (The IRS agreed to this in June 1999). "Neither alcohol nor even heroin exerts a more powerful addictive effect than nicotine," p 243.

In 1984, in Gordon v Schweiker, Secretary of Health and Human
Services, 725 F2d 231, 236; 4 Soc.Sec.Rep.Ser. 25; Unempl.Ins.Rep. CCH 15,029
(CA 4, 11 Jan 1984), the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals took account of the mental disorder (addiction) aspect of smoking, saying: "Smoking, like alcohol abuse, can be an involuntary act for some persons. We believe that allegations of tobacco abuse should be treated in the same fashion as allegations of alcohol abuse." (In truth, all smoking is involuntary as the legal definition for "informed choice" has not been met.)

In 1995, tobacco pushers made the news when they denied that nicotine is addictive! The denial to Congress became a laughingstock. This helped confirm nicotine addictiveness. The data here shows they have long known!

In 1986, even North Carolina agreed that to prevent nicotine addiction (euphemism for brain damage) in children, a school smoking ban was acceptable!! The case went all the way to the North Carolina Supreme Court! Craig by Craig v Buncombe County Board of Education, 80 NC App 683; 343 SE2d 222 (20 May 1986) appeal dismissed, 318 NC 281; 348 SE 2d 138 (28 Aug 1986).

In 1989, Dr. Milhorn said:

"Nicotine is a psychoactive drug . . . the pharmacologic and behavioral processes that determine nicotine addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to heroin and cocaine. . . . A puff of smoke results in a measureable nicotine level in the brain in seconds. With regular use, nicotine accumulates in the body during the day and persists overnight. Thus, smokers are exposed to the effects of nicotine 24 hoursa a day. Nicotine readily crosses the blood brain barrier where it acts as an agonist on specific cholinergic receptors in the central nervous system." H. Thomas Milhorn, Jr., M.D., Ph.D., "Cigarette Smoking: More Than a Habit," 30 J Mississippi State Medical Ass'n (9) 281-286 (Sep 1989).

In 1989, cigarettes' role as gateway drug was described:

"The mean ages of reported first use . . . ranged from age 12.0 for cigarettes and 12.6 for alcohol, to age 14 for marijuana . . . cigarettes were the drug with the youngest . . . age of onset . . . Use of cigarettes was shown to significantly increase the likelihood [of] using other drugs (e.g., beer, marijuana) two years later . . . [When youths] start with one substance, that substance will most likely be cigarettes, not marijuana or alcohol." Fleming, R., Levanthal, H., Glynn, K., and Ershler, J. "The Role of Cigarettes In The Initiation And Progression Of Early Substance Use." 14 Addictive Behavior 261 (1989).

In 1994, the Surgeon General said:

"Among addictive behaviors, cigarette smoking is the one most likely to become established during adolescence . . . Tobacco use is associated with alcohol and illicit drug use and is generally the first drug used by young people who enter a sequence of drug use that can include tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and harder drugs. . . . Tobacco use in adolescence is associated with a range of health-compromising behaviors, including being involved in fights, carrying weapons, engaging in higher-risk sexual behavior, and using alcohol and other drugs. . . . The initiation and development of tobacco use among children and adolescents progresses in five stages: from forming attitudes and beliefs about tobacco, to trying, experimenting with, and regularly using tobacco, to being addicted. . . . Illegal sales of tobacco products are common." U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services, Preventing Tobacco Use Among Young People: A Report of the Surgeon General (1994).

In 1994, the American Psychiatric Association updated the data on smoking as a mental disorder, not a habit—in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) (1994), pages 242-247.

In 1995, Dr. Charles O'Brien, MD, PhD, gave a lecture to medical students at the University of Pennsylvania on September 22, 1995, entitled "Nicotine Dependence, saying for example, that:

"Because of the 400,000 deaths produced each year by smoking, including 50,000 in non-smokers due to passive inhalation of second-hand smoke, it can reasonably be argued that nicotine is the most important drug of abuse. Heroin and cocaine combined produce no more than 6,000 deaths per year in contrast. More than 90% of male smokers and 85% of female smokers start smoking before age 21 and nearly 10% even before the age of 13."
"The highest prevalence rates for smoking are observed in psychiatric patients. Almost 90% of schizophrenics smoke and 45-49% of patients with anxiety and personality disorders smoke."
"Nicotine is arguably the most important dependence-producing drug because it provides the reinforcement for the smoking of cigarettes, the most common cause of preventable death and disease in the United States. The dependence produced by nicotine can be extremely durable as exemplified by the high failure rate among smokers who try to quit. Although over 80% of smokers express a desire to quit, only 35% try to stop each year and less than 5% are successful in unaided attempts to quit (APA, DSM IV, 1994."
"Nicotine is readily absorbed through the skin, mucous membranes and, of course, through the lungs. The pulmonary route produces discernible CNS effects in as little as seven seconds. Thus each puff produces some discrete reinforcement. With 10 puffs per cigarette, the one pack per day smoker reinforces the habit 200 times daily."

In 1997, Food and Drug Administration action to regulate cigarettes due to their addictiveness was cited in court, Coyne Beahm, Inc v FDA, 966 F Supp 1374 (MD NC, 25 April 1997), as the fact is so well-established.

In 2004, Bruce Parker, M.D., "Urban Legends" Letter, 50 Car and Driver (Issue #4) p 22 (October 2004), says in context of smoker's addiction, of an emergency room incident of his, caused by the lighting of a cigarette lighter "to see how much fuel was left in the 55-gallon drum at hand." The fuel center owner was burned over 90% of body, and thus died. Parker writes, "I also firmly believe that smokingdamages one's thinking ability, leading to this type error." (See also the similar McAfee and Travis incidents above-cited, and other similar tobacco-use-caused fires.)

In May 2006, research by Jennifer Fidler, Ph.D. (of University College London), J. Wardle, N. Henning Brodersen, M. J. Jarvis, and R. West, reported as "Vulnerability to smoking after trying a single cigarette can lie dormant for three years or more," in vol. 15, Tobacco Control, pp 205-209 (July 2006), found that merely one cigarette can be enough to start the addictive process in a non-smoker (typically children being targeted by pushers). The term for the danger thus posed by a single cigarette is "sleeper effect." The effect involves raising a person's vulnerability for three years or more to becoming a regular smoker. "We know that progression from experimenting with one cigarette to being a smoker can take several years," said Fidler. "But for the first time we've shown that there may be a period of dormancy between trying cigarettes and becoming a regular smoker - a 'sleeper effect' or vulnerability to nicotine addition." Fidler et al. did a five year study of the impact of smoking just one cigarette on more than 2,000 children, ages 11 to 16. Results: Of 260 children who by age 11 had tried one cigarette, 18 percent were regular smokers by age 14. But only 7 percent of 11-year-olds who had never smoked had begun smoking three years later. Warning: Even the first "shot through the head" (1836 terminology) can have fatal results.

"Drug addiction is a brain disease." "Although initial drug use might be voluntary, once addiction develops this control is markedly disrupted. Imaging studies have shown specific abnormalities in the brains of some, but not all, addicted individuals. While scientific advancements in the understanding of addiction have occurred at unprecedented speed in recent years, unanswered questions remain that highlight the need for further research to better define the neurobiological processes involved in addiction," says NIDA's Director Dr. Nora D. Volkow
in Addiction Is a 'Brain Disease,'" as "Addiction Disrupts Brain Circuitry." See NIDA Press Release and article by Drs. Nora D. Volkow and Ting-Kai Li in Nature Reviews Neuroscience (December 2004).

In 2013, the American Psychiatric Association updated the data on smoking as a mental disorder, not a habit—in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-5), § 16, "Substance Related and Addictive Disorders," pages 571-574, "Tobacco use disorder," and pp 575-576, "Tobacco withdrawal." Criterion § 8 on p 571 cites the mental disorder as including "recurrent tobacco use in situations in which it is physically dangerous," i.e., always.

. . . . And on and on, vast numbers of citations, 1527 to present. Such data refutes lay mythology about tobacco addiction as somehow a modern discovery!! No, it's old data, from the same era as evidence of the earth being round!!

Examples of other tobacco links include but are not limited to the following:

This obective medical data refutes the lay myth that smoking is merely a "habit." Officially, that myth was refuted long ago. Myths die hard; there are some people who still think the earth is flat!! even though that myth was also refuted long ago.

Tobacco is an addiction, not a habit, says Ronald M. Davis, M.D., (a health authority during Gov. John Engler's first term), "The Language of Nicotine Addiction: Purging the Word 'Habit' From Our Lexicon," 1 Tobacco Control 163-164 (1992), opposing the "Big Tobacco" myth that smoking is merely a habit.

Michigan's law MCL § 750.27, MSA § 28.216 bans cigarettes, as the only method of preventing cigarette-caused harm. Michigan Governor John Engler (1991-2002) and staff were supportive of action to enforce that law, issuing five pertinent memoranda: